Election 2020

I'm Betting the 2020 Election Polls Are Junk

It's too early to make predictions based on public opinion surveys.

|

It's too early to draw conclusions from surveys about who will win the 2020 Democratic presidential nomination. The race is apt to dramatically change in the 15 months until a victor is formally declared, and some of the candidates who will play significant roles in the coming conversation haven't appeared on most voters' radar screens.

Look back at Gallup polling from this point in the race 12 years ago. In April 2007, a quarter of the American public had not yet formed an opinion of eventual Democratic nominee Barack Obama, and a fifth were blank when it came to eventual Republican nominee John McCain. This is important: When a large chunk of the electorate—easily big enough to swing the eventual outcome—could still go either way, public opinion surveys can't be trusted to have much predictive power. Indeed, Hillary Clinton and Rudy Giuliani led polls throughout 2007. Whoops.

One issue is that as exciting new candidates enter the race, attitudes toward the pre-existing front-runners can undergo major shifts. Check out Clinton's "net favorables" that year, for example. As Obama came onto the scene (with his name recognition jumping from 53 percent in December 2006 to 72 percent a month later), voters' positive feelings about the New York senator waned, at times even dropping into negative territory:

Net favorability for Democratic candidates in 2007
Gallup

That race, of course, is ancient history. And an apples-to-apples comparison with 2016—the next time there was an open Democratic field—isn't possible, because Gallup stopped conducting pre-election "horse-race" surveys after its embarrassing miss in 2012. But I'm betting we're going to see something similar in the coming year.

Literally betting.

If you regularly listen to the Reason Podcast, you've probably heard me say that we should all hold off on prognosticating because little-known contenders—folks such as former San Antonio, Texas, Mayor Julian Castro—still have lots of time to make an impact. To prove I meant it, I invested $10 at PredictIt* on the theory that Castro—a young, charismatic Latino who served as President Obama's secretary of Housing and Urban Development—is, at 1–2 cents a share, being undervalued by the market.

That's not to say I think the 44-year-old will actually win the nomination. But I predict his odds will increase as the field solidifies. As I type this, former Vice President Joe Biden is trading at 17 cents, for example. If he decides not to run, as he did four years ago, the remaining candidates' chances in toto will increase. Meanwhile, as Castro's name recognition improves (again, most people don't know anything about him yet), he could see a bump. That'll be even more likely if his newly released, arguably radical immigration plan attracts the notice of the rest of the field.

One major problem with my theory is that I might have chosen the wrong "young, exciting mayor" to break in and steal the spotlight: South Bend, Indiana, Mayor Pete Buttigieg—a gay 37-year-old self-proclaimed progressive I honestly hadn't heard of three months ago—is trading at an astonishing 17 cents per share, alongside Biden and California Sen. Kamala Harris. "Mayor Pete," as he's come to be called, seems to be the Democratic darling of the current political moment.

But I actually think that strengthens my overall case. First, it shows that someone can emerge almost out of nowhere to upend the conventional wisdom and scramble the poll results. Second, it shows how out of whack our current expectations likely are. Do we really think a former McKinsey and Co. consultant, whose only governing experience is overseeing a city of 100,000 people, is eight times as likely to secure the nomination as Castro, the older, more experienced former leader of the second-most-populous city in America's second-largest state? More than twice as likely as Democratic Sens. Cory Booker (N.J.) and Elizabeth Warren (Mass.), even?

Maybe he is, but I'm not betting on it.

*CORRECTION: This post originally said the bet was made on InTrade, a now-defunct site, instead of PrecictIt.

NEXT: Texas Inmate With a Wool Allergy Has Spent 10 Years Trying To Get a New Blanket

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Thank you. Every election cycle the media misrepresents what polls mean. The end result never has anything to do with the polls at the beginning of the campaign season.

    One concerning thing from current polls, even if they are otherwise meaningless: people seem to be giving more support to white dudes, even ones with little experience or whose campaign style is substance-free emo.

    1. I am making 7 to 6 dollar par hour at home on laptop ,, This is make happy But now i am Working 4 hour Dailly and make 40 dollar Easily .. This is enough for me to happy my family..how ??
      i am making this so u can do it Easily…. http://www.Aprocoin.com

    2. THINK ABOUT IT?..
      Earning in the modern life is not as difficult as it is thought to be. God has made man for comfort then why we are so stressed. We are giving you the solution of your problems. Come and join us here on just go to home TECH tab at this site and start a fair income bussiness
      >>>>>>>> http://www.payshd.com

    3. THINK ABOUT IT?..
      Earning in the modern life is not as difficult as it is thought to be. God has made man for comfort then why we are so stressed. We are giving you the solution of your problems. Come and join us here on just go to home TECH tab at this site and start a fair income bussiness

      >>>>>>>> http://xurl.es/Incomehere

  2. Do we really think a former McKinsey and Co. consultant…

    People who successfully convince large corporations to shell out millions of dollars for some fancy powerpoint charts stating the obvious are probably uniquely qualified to succeed in politics, I’d say…

    1. I think the author fails to remember that BO was nothing more than a community organizer and a reasonably good speaker. This was all that was needed to get him elected…twice. This only happened because of the political environment forced by the winds of change allowed such a flawed candidate to succeed. So Butterieg, even with his baggage still has a shot if his message is good. But the political winds are blowing only by an anti-Trump media made weak by the release of the Mueller docs, and worse a congress bereft of solutions by the new flock of useful idiots that would make Stalin happy. Electing Trump, if anything exposed the media and the FBI/DOJ collusion that really was the culprit in all of the Russia gate Shiite. Worse for the Dems however is that those supporting him at levels 5 time Castro, are the same frisking racists that run today’s DNC. They want change as long as it is a YOUNG white liberal, not a black, again, or Latino/a liberal Biden or Sanders. Personally if the left wants to win the presidency soon, they need to sit out 2020 and see where 2024 take them. I do not believe Trump can be beat in the next cycle, particularly if all the left has is anti-trump rhetoric. There are too many idiots with their hat in the race for the DNC and if not thinned out soon will simply dilute any message they push to the point of being valueless.

  3. all polls are junk.

    1. They are not. They measure exactly what they are set up to measure. People are junk because they can’t figure out that 51% isn’t the same as 100%.

      1. individuals don’t answer en masse. all polls are extrapolation. not science.

        1. The other problem with polls are that they are expensive to conduct. The Presidential election is not a national runoff. It is a collection of fifty state elections. So, the national numbers are usually somewhat indictitive of the state numbers but not much more than that. No one other than the campaigns have the money to run good polls in every state or every battleground state. The news media relies on meaningless national polls and cheap, poorly conducted state polls. Even if you believe in polling, that is not a reliable way to do it.

          1. Polls are for the most part reliable indicators, and have become increasingly so with more sophisticated methods. How the political media report on the polls might not accurately reflect what the polls actually say, as was the case in 2016.

        2. If I could require ONE BOOK as high school reading, it would be HOW TO LIE WITH STATISTICS.

          1. I am firmly convinced that the media and democrats use polls to gaslight people into voting Democrat. The truth is most people don’t pay that much attention to politics. And most of the people who don’t, will pretty much go along with whatever the prevailing wisdom is because that is the easiest thing to do. So, the media conducts bias polls to make the preferred position look popular and thus giving those in the middle and who are not paying much attention a reason to take the desired position.

            1. I am firmly convinced that the media and democrats use polls to gaslight people into voting Democrat.

              It’s not really an accident that their polls so consistently over-represent Democrat or left-leaning voters.

              1. They do it far too consistently for it to be an accident.

            2. I’m not sure I believe that. It seems to me equally likely that living in an echo chamber has made the pollsters unable to see their own bias. They pick their samples to match their experience, and thus there’s an imbalance between Left, Right, and what-have-you. The polls are accurate….for all populations that match the poll samples. The 2016 poll, taken from samples that resembled California, Chicago, and New York City, predicted that Shrillary would win in a landslide. And she did…in California, Chicago, and New York City.

              1. CSP,

                I see what you are saying but I find it difficult to believe anyone could be so isolated from reality that they think California or New York is representative of the entire country, especially a person whose job it is to figure out the national mood. I don’t buy that. They know the polls are slanted. They have to.

                1. >>>media conducts bias polls to make the preferred position look popular

                  >>> living in an echo chamber has made the pollsters unable to see their own bias

                  little from column a, little from column b = everybody correct?

          2. Is that a PUA manual?

        3. I doubt any of the polling companies have even successfully analysed what went wrong in 2016. The solution to this enigma is easy. The left made it so toxic for people to openly support Trump that Trump supporters either did not participate of simply lied to the pollsters. They then voted the way they always intended to do on the day.
          I strongly suspect that most of the people who voted for Trump decided very early on in the campaign.

          1. Once Trump beat the snot out of the other 17 “contenders” the rest of the work needed to get him elected was very, very easy…

          2. Exactly. I could totally see an inner city voter in 2016 going to the polls wearing an “I’m with Her” t-shirt and casting a vote for Trump after his “what the hell do you have to lose” speech, but would not confess that to anyone

    2. Data is data. Because it doesn’t always accurately predict the future doesn’t mean it’s useless.

      Anybody who wants to explain what’s happening and why without any reference to the data should . . . I dunno . . . sign up for classes at the Robby Soave school of journalism, I guess?

      1. >>>doesn’t mean it’s useless

        not data of course not. political polls are shit, that’s all … people lie people are clueless people are easily manipulated by words samples are too small and so on

  4. A politician I know once told me that if it takes more than 30 seconds to explain, you have lost the argument. “Creepy Joe” just sticks. No amount of drawn out explanations and “Yeah buts” beats that. I am starting to think this is going to finish him. Not only is it short and easy to understand, it has videos. And never underestimate the power of video to stick in people’s mind.

    1. wanted him out since the 80s but the way he’s being driven out is not right and makes me sympathetic … strange sense

      1. I don’t know about that. I have never known a time or a place where it was considered appropriate to smell women’s hair and get all touchy with them in a professional environment. And I certainly have never seen anywhere or known anyone who thought doing that to a little girl who wasn’t your daughter appropriate or anything but gross. And that is what he did. The videos speak for themselves. Then there is the old New York Times Article about how he used to swim naked in front of his female Secret Service agents when he was VP.

        I think Biden is a legitimate miscreant. In some ways this is worse than the imfamous Trump “pussy grabbing” tape. At least that is a somewhat normal desire. What kind of a wierdo smells women’s hair?

        1. I’m sorta with Dillinger, in the sense that I think the Democrats are being disingenuous about this. Did they really only just figure out that the dude is creepy? He was doing that shit while he was VP, and if the Dems minded they weren’t very vocal about it.

          1. They knew about it and let it slide. The rumor is that Bernie Sanders got this going. I don’t know what you do with it. Biden is a creep. But, if I really liked whatever he stands for and thought he would be a good President, is this enough to justify voting for him? Maybe but I can certainly see how someone would think it wouldn’t be.

            1. The rumor is that Bernie Sanders got this going.

              The first woman to say anything, Lisa Flores, worked on Sanders’ campaign and is now attached to O’Rourke’s. So all this noise is probably from one or both of those sources, although I don’t think they’re directing the hit themselves. This is just how Leninists operate.

              Wild card is that it’s Hillary. She still has enough influence within the party and is power-hungry enough to make the whole race such a shit-show that she opens up the door to ride in as a “safe” choice. But if that happens, she’ll probably lose the popular vote this time, too, because the rank-and-file are sick of her.

              1. Hillary running again would make Trump competetive in states no Republican since Reagan has been competetive in. For me the big question is whether these polls I keep seeing showing Trump’s approval rating going up among blacks and Hispanics. There have been too many polls that show that for it to be nothing. The quesiton is how much has he risen and if any of that rise would translate into actual votes. If Trump could get five percent more of each than he got in 2016, which would only require him winning around 35% of the Hispanic vote and 10 or 12% of the black vote, the Democrats are doomed. Their margin for error is so low thanks to them writing off a good 70% of the white vote.

              2. Wild card is that it’s Hillary. She still has enough influence within the party and is power-hungry enough to make the whole race such a shit-show that she opens up the door to ride in as a “safe” choice.

                Good Lord. She had jolly well better keep a low profile, lest some “reasonable prosecutor” bring charges.

                1. One could only hope that Hillary lets her ego re-elect Trump.

          2. This is one of those times that the Democrats are harmed by having the media so slanted in their favor. If Biden had been a Republican, he would have been hammered the first time he did this nonsense and likely would have stopped. Instead, the media enabled his bad behavior and now it is coming back to potentially destroy the likely strongest Democratic candidate in 2020.

            1. I wonder if it’s really going to destroy him, though. I’ve talked to Democrat-voting friends and relatives who think it’s a hit-job coming from within the party (the timing of the accusations coming out right before he was to supposedly announce his candidacy was too perfect).

              The real indication is if he decides to declare his candidacy or not. If he chickens out, we’ll have our answer.

              1. Like I say above, I am starting to think it does. The problem for Biden is that he has to win the nomination. If he already had the nomination, this might not be as big of a problem. Democrats are absolutely going to vote for him over Trump I don’t care if a video of him putting his hand down a woman’s shirt turned up. This is not the general election, however, and his opponent is not Trump. His opponents are other Democrats who are likely to be acceptable to Democratic voters. So while Democrats wouldn’t vote for Trump over Biden because of this, I bet they vote for Harris or Beto or some other Democrat over Biden.

        2. I have never known a time or a place where it was considered appropriate to smell women’s hair and get all touchy with them in a professional environment.

          We ain’t all choirboys here, John, you can save your virtue-signaling for some place where the “men” would be clutching their pearls at the suggestion that you’ve ever engaged a professional woman for the purposes of being a professional woman.

          1. No, I never have. And I certainly never have to some other guy’s wife. If you think this shit is in any way tolerated in the workplace, you are delussional. It is not about virtue signaling. It is reality.

            1. John hits on his female coworkers by bringing them donuts. And putting them on his index finger as he offers them.

              1. If you could successfully hit on women by just walking up and groping them Biden style, there would be a lot more men getting laid a lot more often.

          2. Forget my experience, my mother’s generation wouldn’t have tolerated this crap. My mother would have humiliated a guy if they had tried this crap.

        3. There is nothing professional about politics.
          (except maybe in a ‘professional wrestling’ kind of way)

          1. Don’t break kayfabe.

            1. This is Trump’s biggest sin. He broke kayfabe.

              1. Yes! This, so much.

        4. oh he’s a creep in any decade for sure it’s just bizarre how the left is freaking on itself … now

          it’s like a book-burning of men w/white hair who made (D) what it is over the last 30 years … i normally wouldn’t respond kindly to a book-burning of any kind

      2. The funny thing is that none of this is down to the Republicans. I’ll bet Trump would have loved for Biden to win the nomination. He would have had a field day using the phrase ‘Creepy Uncle Joe’ against Biden.
        This is all down to the Dems destroying Biden before he has even decided to put his name forward, but, lets face it. Biden deserves every bit of the negativity he is getting. He is creepy and should not be allowed near kids.

    2. The fact that his national aspirations were revived after his plagiarism scandal only proves how hard it is to kill the career of a Democrat.

      That he is considered the moderate voice of reason relative to the other Democrats is somewhat frightening.

      1. The only reason the plagerism thing did kill him nationally is because Obama chose him as VP. Had Obama chosen anyone else, Biden would be just another hack Democrat Senator. I honestly have no idea why Obama chose him. Biden brough absolutely nothing to the ticket. But, it did revive his national career and put the plagerism thing behind him.

        1. It seems like Obama genuinely likes Biden as a person. They seemed to be better friends while in office that most other pairs. Maybe that was enough. Who knows?

          From a purely rational, political view, it certainly didn’t make any sense. There were plenty of other old, white men for Obama to choose from who might have actually brought a few battleground states with them.

        2. “I honestly have no idea why Obama chose him”

          Creepy Uncle Joe gives the best rub-n-tugs

    3. Again, the problem is that “Creepy Joe” isn’t anywhere near as scary as the Green New Deal.

      I’d pick “Creepy Joe” over every other Democrat on the board. I think these attacks on him are largely about the SJW socialists trying to knock him out of the race for being insufficiently woke and socialist, and I’m not about to carry water for them.

      I didn’t lose sight of the fact that Trump was clearly preferable to Hillary Clinton on libertarian issues–even if he was a pussy grabber–and I’m not about to lose sight of the fact that “Creepy Joe” is better than the rest of the bunch–even if he’s a shoe sniffer.

      Trump is still preferable to Biden, but Biden is miles better than Harris, Sanders, or Warren.

      1. I am sure you would Ken. But you are not voting in the Democratic Primary. The people who are, are likely to be pretty skeeved out by creepy Joe.

      2. The support of the GND will be exploited and used against any of the socialist candidate. It is clearly a very stupid and ill conceived policy full of intersectionality. Who is going to vote for anyone who supports a plan to give money to people who are ‘unwilling’ to work except those who are actually unwilling to work.
        This election will not be fought in the mainstream media. It will be decided by the alternative media. Very few people trust the MSN. Far more people are turning to their subscriptions on You Tube for their information and commentary.
        CNN and MSNBC have lost millions of viewers over their disgusting coverage of Russiagate.
        For over 2 years they promised their viewers that Trump and his family were going to jail. They are now turning on Mueller for not finding anything. This is the guy they all praised constantly for 2 years. Now, they suddenly hate him. The Leftist press are disgusting partisan hypocrites.
        Not that I’m much of a Fox fan, but they consistently got it right and the increase of their viewership increased dramatically as a consequence. I dislike any partisan ‘news organisation’ and Fox only got is right because they supported Trump no matter what.

  5. I agree it’s impossible to know which Democrat will get the nomination. However I can predict with 100% certainty that whoever gets the (D) nomination will win the 2020 election. Drumpf has not only destroyed the economy, he’s destroyed the reputation of the Republican Party for at least the next century. Voters won’t forget he colluded with a hostile foreign power to win a hacked election.

    1. Hows the weather on the planet you post from?

    2. You are truly deluded. Exactly HOW has Trump destroyed the economy. You must be the only person on the planet who believes this. Even the MSM who hate Trump don’t dare bring the subject of the economy up because they are so determined to not print any positive news about Trump.

  6. Based on what we saw in 2016, polls 20 minutes before the election aren’t particularly reliable either.

    1. I’ve been saying this for a while; they trot out the latest poll numbers for Trump, as if we had cause ti believe them.

      Before I take polls seriously, I will want to have explaied to me what was wrong with the 2016 polls, and how the pollsters propose to fix it.

      1. Here is what I think was wrong with the 2016 polls. First, they were based on the assumption that the electorate was going to look just like it had in 2012 and 2016. That proved to be a faulty assumption. Blacks didn’t turn out for Hillary like they did for Obama and a decent number, though not as large as originally thought, of voters who stayed home in 2008 and 2012 because they didn’t see much difference between Obama and McCain or Romney did see a difference in Trump and turned out. Also, I think a lot of people lied and told pollsters they supported Hillary because there was so much hysteria over Trump they didn’t want to admit voting for him. Lastly, I think a lot of voters were soft Hillary supporters and when they actually got in the voting booth, they couldn’t do it and pulled the lever for Trump. I think it was some combination of all of those factors.

        1. The polls also ignored the reality of the electoral college, as they didn’t look at candidate popularity across different states. Well, some did, but they were mostly ignored. The media did nothing to help, even trumpeting an inevitable landslide as the same time the electoral college map was mostly a big question mark.

          In hindsight the loss is easy to understand. But at the time the idea of Democrats not bothering to show up at the polls in states where it mattered was unthinkable.

        2. I think the polls also ignored the simple fact that after the “deplorables” comment ever single person at all inclined to vote for Trump was going to get to the polls to do so if they had to drag their iron long behind them. Similarly, with all the polls telling them that Hillary had it in the bag, all the people who were lukewarm about Her Shrillness had ample reason to stay home and watch paint dry.

  7. Castro?a young, charismatic Latino who served as President Obama’s secretary of Housing and Urban Development?is, at 1?2 cents a share, being undervalued by the market.

    He’s overvalued at that price. Like I’ve said before, no one outside of San Antonio gives a shit about Castro or even knows who he is. He’s not even the most popular Democratic Texan in the race.

    And fuckin’ LOL at calling that dude “charismatic.’ He looks like the love child of a snake and an alien.

    1. And I don’t see Hispanics rallying around Castro out of ethnic loyalty much either.

    2. And as much as I’m sure Julian Castro is a stand-up guy, you know the rightie media will have a field day over that last name, just like they played up Barack !!!HUSSEIN!!! Obama’s middle name.

    3. I live in Houston and never heard about him.

      But Reason has to dream of Dems now. Sad.

    4. Yeah, Slade would have been better off just lighting that 10 dollar bill on fire. At least then she could watch it burn. Castro will be out of the race before the second debate.

  8. What are the odds on that fuckhead Eric Swalwell who’s all but declared and seems to be hanging his hopes on the idea that Donald Trump is going to be exposed as an employee of the Kremlin and will be led off from the Oval Office in handcuffs any day now? I’m sure he’s going to get the hard-core conspiracy nut vote, but how many employees do CNN and MSNBC actually have?

    1. I figure the folks who make Reynolds Wrap will be behind him, since he will be good for the tinfoil hat business.

    2. If SwallowWell declares, it would be the shortest candidacy in history. That idiot is a male AOC without the Instagram following and media butt-kissing.

  9. It’s too early in the election cycle to make any predictions about who will win, but that isn’t the only thing to learn from this data. It’s also helpful in seeing who is doing well and why, who is doing poorly and why . . .

    Biden: 29%
    Sanders: 19%
    O’Rourke: 12%
    Harris: 8%
    Warren: 4%
    Booker: 2%

    —-Katest poll from Quinnipiac among registered Democrats

    Why is Biden doing so well?

    The most likely explanations are that he’s benefiting from name recognition and the fact that he hasn’t gone completely insane on issues like the Green New Deal, reparations for slavery, and Medicare for All. If you want the status quo and you’re a Democrat, you know who Biden is and that’s he’s not bat-shit insane.

    If Harris and O’Rourke are doing well despite the lack of name recognition, the real story is still Liz Warren performing so poorly–despite enjoying more name recognition than Harris or O’Rourke. I see only one reasonable way to interpret that data, and it’s that average Democrat voters know who LIz Warren is–and they don’t like her.

    1. Biden is doing so well because Democrats associate him with the Obama era and see voting for him as voting for a return of the Obama era.

    2. Biden is doing so well because Democrats associate him with the Obama era and see voting for him as voting for a return of the Obama era.

      1. If you’re Liz Warren, and the more people get to know you, the less they like you? You don’t fix that by getting people to know you better.

        She’s supposed to have this amazing national donor network. If her pockets are deep (or get that way), expect her to go negative sooner rather than later.

        It’s gotta be about all the Lie-a-watha stuff. Conservatives care less about Trump’s “pussy-grabbing” than the left cares about someone abusing affirmative action. They won’t say it’s about that, but it is.

        Liz “Dances with Lies” Warren is a serial abuser of affirmative action at worst, a cultural appropriator at best, and everybody hates her for it. Hey Liz, how’s it feel to spend six years of your life trying to make people like you–only to find out that they hate you? At this rate, she won’t make it to Super Tuesday.

        1. Her problem is that she has zero charisma. Hillary has more charisma than Warren. The fact that anyone thought she could be appealing on the national stage such that she would be a serious candidate shows how badly the Democratic media dellude themselves.

          1. Heck, I have more charisma than Warren. And I have all the personality of a bent trash can, and I’m so ugly that if you had a dog that looked like me, you’d shave his butt and make him walk backwards.

            1. How many women would you say have “charisma”? It’s a sexist concept.

              If you’d ever listen to her speak, which you probably haven’t, you’d see she has authenticity and passion. And she smiles, unlike Bernie, who gets more extra credit for charisma than any retard in history.

              1. “How many women would you say have “charisma”? It’s a sexist concept.”

                LOL

    3. Willie Brown wrote a piece this past weekend pitching Pelosi as a candidate; prolly been left off the guest list for a while.
      But there didn’t seem to be a single salute when it was up on that flagpole.

      1. Things have gotten so bad here in California and nationally with this new breed of Democrat, I’m actually looking back at the Willie Brown and Pelosi eras as the good ol’ days.

        Yeah, they were awful–when they were the alternative to Ronald Reagan and Pete Wilson. Those days are gone. The people running Sacramento today are crazier than Willie Brown and Pelosi were back when they were working with Jim Jones and his People’s Temple in NorCal to get them elected.

    4. Yup. I despise Biden, but the best results in a reality based worls I see out of the current lineup is a Biden win in 2020. And just that thought makes me want to go wretch.

      But most probably it’s going to be Trump again because it does not appear that the Democrats understand why they lost in 2016.

    5. Biden, Sanders, Warren and Booker have 0% chances of winning. Too old, too old, too socialist, and too unknown.

      O’Rourke and Harris at least have charisma of a sort, and are young enough to not fall asleep in a meeting or to think it’s okay to sniff women’s hair.

  10. Not me! Nope: Dewey is gonna win!

  11. These polls are every bit as accurate as science can make them; just like all the global climate warming change models, the record of political polls is impeccable.

    1. Polls as they are currently conducted just assume the result they are looking for. Which ever side has the most supporters who will show up and vote win. That has always been the case. The problem is what mix of each side do you sample? Sample too many of either side and the poll is skewed and inacurate. But, if you knew what the mix of each side was among the voting public, you would pretty much know who was going to win and wouldn’t need to conduct a poll. So, they just guess or worse do a gaslighting poll that oversamples whatever side they favor and call it a day.

    2. You people are so fucking stupid it’s painful.

      Don’t make me find somewhere else to hang out.

  12. To prove I meant it, I invested $10 at InTrade on the theory that Castro?a young, charismatic Latino who served as President Obama’s secretary of Housing and Urban Development?is, at 1?2 cents a share, being undervalued by the market.

    WHO?!!

  13. To prove I meant it, I invested $10 at InTrade on the theory that Castro?a young, charismatic Latino who served as President Obama’s secretary of Housing and Urban Development?is, at 1?2 cents a share, being undervalued by the market.

    If one wanted to go about shorting Buttigieg or O’ Rourke, how might one go about doing that?

    If anybody’s political stock is undervalued, it’s Dwayne Johnson’s.

    1. True, but I believe he is on Team MAGA

      1. True, but I believe he is on Team MAGA

        Republican turned independent. ‘Sensibly conservative’ maybe? Not outright ‘Never Trump!’ but modestly outspoken “Can’t we do better than Trump?”

        1. I just remember from before the election, but hadn’t heard anything since.
          Skyscraper was a fun movie. The Chinese are doing very well with their newest purchase – Hollywood

  14. I had no idea San Antonio was bigger than Dallas. I wonder how long that’s been the case.

    1. A long time. San Antonio is enormous.

    2. Also what you think of as “Dallas” includes a bunch of suburbs that are not part of Dallas proper. The actual city limits of Dallas are not that big and significantly smaller than San Antonio. The entire DFW metroplex, however, is larger.

    3. San Antonio: 1.565M people
      Dallas: 1.379M people

      San Antonio metro area: 2.473M
      DFW metroplex: 7.673M people

      Dallas is like 3 times bigger.

  15. Who’s going to win the democratic primary isn’t the important thing to look at in polling at this point. We are over a year out for Gallup’s sake!

    The only potentially predictive polls are those that show how Trump polls against eGaach known Democratic contender. What I’ve seen of those show that Trump is polling relatively fixed across the board. Like it or not, this is to his favor because he is a known quantity with a ton of dirty laundry. His current poll rate is unlikely to go down, while whoever the Dem candidate is can only lose support as they are attacked by their competitors for the nomination.

    I don’t care who the Dem nominee is. I only hope that if they are a hard-core socialist they lose (and lose badly) and if they are a centrist they win. Anything else is a potential disaster for 2024.

    1. Pretty much that. The bottom line of the 2020 election is that Trump won in 2016 as a complete wild card unknown with huge negatives. Absent a economic crash or war or something else catastrophic that can be blamed on Trump, it is going to be awfully hard to beat him running as a known commodity with four years of relative peace and prosperity as President.

  16. So you’re saying Hillary Clinton has a 110% chance of winning.

  17. *Well* worth a few minutes of your time: “Yes, Minister” shows how polls work

  18. Who’s Lloyd Braun’s money on? Seriously, the real Lloyd Braun? He seems to have a terrific knack for picking winners. Plus, he backed my friend Damon’s TV show.

  19. I am making 80$ an hour? After been without work for 8 months, I started freelancing over this website and now I couldn’t be happier. After 3 months on my new job my monthly income is around 15k a month? Cause someone helped me telling me about this job now I am going to help somebody else?
    Check it out for yourself ..
    CLICK HERE?? http://xurl.es/Reason34

  20. ?Google pay 95$ consistently my last pay check was $8200 working 10 hours out of every week on the web. My more young kin buddy has been averaging 15k all through ongoing months and he works around 24 hours consistently. I can’t confide in how straightforward it was once I endeavored it out.This is my primary concern…GOOD LUCK .

    click here =====?? http://www.Geosalary.com

  21. A can’t think of a single person the Dems can put forward that will be able to compete against Trump in the actual election. He had zero record to run with in 2016. Just look at his record in the last 2 years alone.
    Record low unemployment.
    Record high employment among every single group of Americans, including every minority.
    Renegotiated trade deals.
    Peace on the Korean peninsular.
    Real wage rises for the first time in over 10 years.
    Stock market at record highs reaching levels never seen before.
    Many industries returning back to America including Apple and car manufacturers.
    A large section of border wall currently being erected with many more miles to come.
    No new foreign wars.
    Trump has kept all of the promises made during his campaign.
    How will any Dem candidate compete with this.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.